Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 2000 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

2000, Vol. 79, No. 2, 274-285 0022-3514AXW5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.2.274

Mothers' Personality and Its Interaction With Child Temperament as

Predictors of Parenting Behavior

Lee Anna Clark, Grazyna Kochanska, and Rebecca Ready

University of Iowa

In this longitudinal, multimethod investigation, the authors examined mothers' personality and its
interaction with infants' negative emotionality as predictors of parenting behavior. When infants were
8-10 months old (N = 112), mothers completed personality self-reports, and the authors observed
infants' negative emotionality in both standard procedures and naturalistic daily contexts. When infants
were 13-15 months old (iV = 108), the authors observed two aspects of parenting, power assertion and
maternal responsiveness, in mother-child interactive contexts. Maternal personality alone and also in
interaction with child emotionality predicted future parenting behaviors. The longitudinal links estab-
lished between personality and parenting behaviors indicate the predictive utility of personality. Findings
also highlight the bidirectionality of the early parent-child relationship.

Individual differences in personality are expressed in a vast
range of behavioral domains, including social relationships (Asen-
dorpf, 1998), job performance (Mount, Barrick, & Stewart, 1998;
Tett, Jackson, Rothstein, & Reddon, 1999), psychopathology
(Watson & Clark, 1994), and health behaviors (Booth-Kewley &
Vickers, 1994; Wiebe & Smith, 1997). Surprisingly little is known,
however, about links between personality and parenting, despite its
importance as a major life task. In the near-1000-page Handbook
of Personality Psychology (Hogan, Johnson, & Briggs, 1997),
parenting or parent personality is the focus of only two chapters.
Eder and Mangelsdorf (1997) primarily discussed associations
between parent personality and infant attachment behavior but did
not examine the parenting behaviors that may link the two con-
structs. In the same volume, Halverson and Wampler (1997)
tellingly began their chapter, "Family Influences on Personality
Development," with "This essay is mostly about missing data" (p.
241). Given the amount of research attention that has been focused
on genetic links between parent and child personality and given the
traditional focus of socialization research on the link between
parenting and child outcomes, the relative dearth of data on rela-
tions between parental personality and parenting is striking.
Moreover, what little we do know about relations between
parents' personalities and behavior is further limited by three
factors. First, with a few recent exceptions, existing research is
largely based on paper-and-pencil measures of parenting that often
are retrospective. Kendler, Sham, and MacLean (1997), for exam-
ple, investigated retrospective perceptions of parenting by both
parent and adult offspring in a large epidemiological sample using
the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI; Parker, 1989). They re-
ported that parental personality and psychopathology (as well as
Lee Anna Clark, Grazyna Kochanska, and Rebecca Ready, Department
of Psychology, University of Iowa.
Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to Lee Anna
Clark, Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, E l l Seashore Hall,
Iowa City, Iowa 52242. Electronic mail may be sent to la-clark@
uiowa.edu.
marital quality and child temperament) predicted the PBI Warmth
factor, whereas anxious traits in both parent and child predicted
PBI Protectiveness.
We also have found significant correlations, in self-report, of
personality with power assertion and warmth/responsiveness in
mothers of young children (Kochanska, Clark, & Goldman, 1997).
Specifically, mothers' negative emotionality and disagreeableness
(themselves correlated), predicted more power-assertive and less
responsive parenting. There is, however, clearly confounded
method variance when the same individual completes both per-
sonality and parenting measures. This limitation is found also in
research examining links between personality self-reports by adult
offspring and their recall of parental characteristics (e.g., McCrae
& Costa, 1988; Pincus & Ruiz, 1997).
Second, the assessment of personality often has been limited to
the broad dimension of neuroticism or negative affectivity (NA),
and only occasionally also positive affectivity (PA). Certainly, the
NA dimension has important behavioral ramifications for parent-
ing. For example, Fish and Stifter (1993) reported a significant
negative correlation between NA and mothers' observed sensitiv-
ity. Similarly, maternal NA assessed prenatally was inversely
related to mothers' expressivity with their infants 3-months post-
partum (Goldstein, Diener, & Mangelsdorf, 1996). In our own
work also, NA (and also disagreeableness) was inversely related to
observed adaptive parenting as well as to the self-reported parent-
ing mentioned earlier (Kochanska et al., 1997).
A few studies have assessed parents' personality more compre-
hensively and measured parenting independently. Mangelsdorf,
Gunnar, Kestenbaum, Lang, and Andreas (1990) obtained mea-
sures of mothers' personality using Tellegen's (in press) Multidi-
mensional Personality Questionnaire. They found that mothers
who reported higher levels of PA were rated as warmer and more
supportive in interactions with their 9-month-old infants.
Belsky, Crnic, and Woodworth (1995) assessed the Big Five
dimensions of mothers' and fathers' personality using the NEO
Personality Inventory (McCrae & Costa, 1984) and found three
traits related to observed parenting of their young toddler sons:
Neuroticism, which generally was associated with less adaptive

274
 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING
parenting (less sensitive, less affectively positive, less stimulating),
and extroversion and agreeableness, which were linked to more
adaptive parenting. Some of the relations were mediated by the
parents' day-to-day mood and feeling burdened by daily hassles,
and some were different for mothers and fathers.
It seems likely, however, that other personality characteristics
may be as important—or even more important—in influencing
parenting. In our earlier work, we included sociability, constraint,
and socialization, measured using the California Personality In-
ventory (Gough, 1987), in addition to NA and disagreeableness.
Although most findings for parenting were modest, socialization
was related to more adaptive observed parenting. The findings
involving children's outcomes, however, were stronger, suggesting
additional links between parent personality and child behaviors
that are not mediated by parenting.
Another potentially important personality characteristic is em-
pathy, which may be a facet of agreeableness (Watson, Clark, &
Harkness, 1994). Parental low empathy has been associated with
physical child abuse (Rosenstein, 1995), children's distress levels
in a laboratory situation (Eisenberg, Fabes, Schaller, & Carlo,
1991), and children's TV content preferences (Tangney, 1988).
Empathy also is a natural candidate for a trait that would facilitate
parents' ability to "read" children's signals and respond sensitively
and supportively to the child's needs (Dix, 1992). Consistent with
this prediction, Kochanska (1997b) found that highly empathic
mothers developed a more mutually positive relationship with their
young children.
A third limitation is that many studies have used clinical sam-
ples, most commonly depressed mothers, to study personality and
parenting. Certainly there is ample evidence that maternal depres-
sion is associated with problems in parenting (e.g., Cummings &
Davies, 1994; Dodge, 1990; Downey & Coyne, 1990; Goodman &
Gotlib, 1999; but see Frankel & Harmon, 1996 for a counterex-
ample). Moreover, there are strong and fairly consistent associa-
tions between personality and psychopathology (see Watson &
Clark, 1994). Those associations for depression have been partic-
ularly well studied: Depressed persons tend to be high in NA and
low in PA (Clark, Watson, & Mineka, 1994); results for other traits
have been mixed.
However, it can be difficult to untangle the influence of transient
state affect from more enduring trait characteristics in this domain
(see discussions by Clark et al., 1994; Watson & Clark, 1995;
Widiger & Trull, 1992). Accordingly, assessments of personality
in depressed mothers are confounded with current psychiatric
state, so it is not clear how to parse the influence of state versus
trait variance on parenting. Thus, extrapolations to normative
samples from the body of literature examining the role of person-
ality in parenting in depressed mothers are not straightforward.
A primary goal of this research was to overcome these three
limitations in our examination of personality and parenting. Thus,
we measured parenting behaviors using rich observational data
coded from numerous interactions between mothers and children;
we assessed multiple dimensions of personality including a well-
validated measure of the Big Five and a measure of maternal
empathy; and we used a community-based sample. Moreover, we
examined relations between personality and parenting longitudi-
nally, measuring maternal personality 5 months prior to the ob-
servational assessment of parenting behaviors. This longitudinal
design eliminates the state-trait confound and is based on a con-
275
ceptualization of personality as a set of stable dispositions that
have enduring and relatively consistent effects across time.
Finally, our choice of parenting measures was theoretically
driven. Two qualities of maternal behavior, style of control and
responsiveness to the child, were selected as reflecting central
dimensions of socialization at the beginning of the second year.
This period marks a dramatic increase in parental control, limit
setting, and discipline when parents start to enforce initial stan-
dards of behavior and expect children to begin to comply with their
demands (Kuczynski, Kochanska, Radke-Yarrow, & Gimius
Brown, 1987; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). The style of control,
particularly the amount of power used, is well recognized as
differentiating among parents (Bugental & Goodnow, 1998; Mac-
coby & Martin, 1983).
Parental responsiveness to the child is another critical quality of
early parenting and is a concept that has evolved from the histor-
ically earlier dimension of warmth or nurturance (Maccoby, 1992;
Maccoby & Martin, 1983) to acquire a particularly privileged
status within attachment research (Ainsworth, Bell, & Stayton,
1971; Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). Responsiveness
is a complex concept that encompasses sensitivity to child signals,
prompt and appropriate response, cooperation with and respect for
child autonomy, emotional support, warmth and acceptance, and
occasionally, emotional availability (De Wolff & van Dzendoorn,
1997).
A second major goal of this research was to expand on previous
work that primarily has examined relations between personality or
parenting and child variables. New to our work is a consideration
of the complexity of child effects that enter the socialization
process in multiple ways (Bell, 1968; Belsky, 1984). Exactly how
the child's individuality influences socialization is difficult to
determine, and research yields a complex portrayal of causal
mechanisms. Early temperamentally based predispositions have
been implicated as factors that evoke differential reactions from
caregivers and so set the stage for future parenting (Crockenberg,
1986; Lytton, 1990; Scarr & McCartney, 1983) or moderate the
impact of parental socialization on future outcomes (Bates, Pettit,
Dodge, & Ridge, 1998; Belsky, 1997; Bugental & Goodnow,
1998; Kochanska, 1997a; Thomas & Chess, 1977).
In particular, early child difficulty (also termed negative emo-
tionality or distress-proneness), perhaps because of its salience in
infancy and early childhood, has been considered as a factor that
often determines the future trajectory of the child-caregiver rela-
tionship and the process of socialization. Infants' negative emo-
tionality can bridge research on parenting with that on relations
between stress and personality insofar as it provides a convenient
and ecologically valid measure of a protracted and relatively
serious stressor that permeates the context of early parenting.
In the broader personality literature, numerous studies have
investigated whether an NA-stress interaction better predicts var-
ious outcomes (e.g., health behaviors or job performance) than
does either NA or stress alone, but positive results have been
meager. A major reason for this lack of findings may be that both
variables are usually measured by self-report, in which case the
NA-stress relation is typically quite strong (e.g., Watson, 1988),
making the emergence of interactive effects unlikely. In the de-
velopmental literature, mother's reports are typically used to assess
the stressor of interest (i.e., the child's difficult emotionality). For
example, Milgrom and McCloud (1996) reported that mothers with
276 CLARK, KOCHANSKA, AND READY
postnatal depression rated their infants as less adaptable, more
moody, and more demanding than did mothers without postnatal
depression, but this assessment may be colored by the mother's
own clinical state (see, however, Richters, 1992). Under these
circumstances, when one person supplies both the personality and
stress data, the measurements are significantly confounded by
shared method variance.
In contrast, interactions have emerged in some studies that have
successfully disentangled the assessment of NA and stress. For
example, Marco and Suls (1993) assessed stressful events prospec-
tively and found that high-NA individuals responded with more
negative mood than did those low in NA. Gilbert, Stunkard,
Jensen, and Detwiler (1996), on the other hand, reported an inter-
action between NA and exam stress of the opposite type: During
the stressful exam period, all students reacted similarly, but under
nonstressful conditions, high-NA students reported higher nega-
tive mood. In our research, therefore, we elected to assess child
difficulty (negative emotionality) using rich, objective, observa-
tional data that were not confounded with mothers' self-reported
personality traits.
A final common problem in research on personality, parenting,
and child variables is difficulty interpreting the direction of cau-
sality, because often all variables are assessed concurrently. Our
longitudinal design reduces this ambiguity: We obtained measures
of maternal personality and child difficulty in the child's infancy,
and we assessed maternal behavior 5 months later.
Given the paucity of prior research that measured personality
independently of both parenting and child emotionality, we were
limited in our ability to make empirically based predictions. Cer-
tainly, we expected that maternal NA (neuroticism), disagreeable-
ness, and low empathy would be associated with less adaptive
parenting. Further, on the basis of theory and the broader person-
ality literature, we hypothesized that extraversion and conscien-
tiousness would be associated with more adaptive parenting. No
predictions regarding openness were made, as only one association
between openness and parenting has been reported in the literature
(Peterson, Smirles, & Wentworth, 1997). It was not clear whether
an interaction with child emotionality would emerge for any of the
maternal personality variables. Moreover, we thought it was pre-
mature to make differential predictions regarding more specific
links between personality and aspects of parenting.
Method
Overview
Mothers and children participated in two assessments: a home session at
8-10 months and a laboratory session at 13-15 months, each approxi-
mately 1-1/2-2 hours. Both assessments were conducted and videotaped by
female research assistants. At 8-10 months, the mother and child inter-
acted in standard yet naturalistic contexts (e.g., mother busy with kitchen
chores, mother bathing the infant, feeding the infant a snack, joint play, and
other typical daily routines, cumulatively 60 min). These observations were
used to assess the child's negative emotionality. The infant was observed
also in standard procedures assessing early individual differences in neg-
ative emotionality. At this time, both parents completed self-report per-
sonality questionnaires; only mothers' data are used in this article. When
the infants were 13-15 months old, we again observed the mother and child
in many interactive contexts (40 min) to assess aspects of parenting
behavior.
In coding the observed behaviors, we followed several guidelines: (a)
each data set was coded by a separate team; (b) coders "realigned"
periodically to prevent observer drift; (c) at least 15% of cases were used
to determine interrater reliability; (d) kappas were typically used for
categorical judgments, and alphas for continuous judgments (Bakeman &
Gottman, 1989, pp. 92-96); and (e) data were aggregated at multiple levels
to increase robustness of measured constructs (Epstein, 1983; Rushton,
Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983).
Sample
At the first assessment (mean age = 8.94 months, SD = .63), 112
mothers of normally developing infants (56 girls, 56 boys) were recruited
into the "Parent-Child Study" using advertisements in local papers, day-
care centers, a daily newsletter circulated in a large health care complex,
and through invitations sent to parents listed in the county's birth records.
The criteria for acceptance were (a) both biological parents were living at
home; (b) infant was full-term, normally developing, and free of any
unusual health problems; and (c) the family was not planning to move
away for the duration of the study. All families lived in several counties in
Iowa, were mostly White (mothers 97%, fathers 92%), and represented a
broad socioeconomic status range in terms of education, income, and
occupation. Over half the parents had completed college or some post-
graduate education (59% and 57% of mothers and fathers, respectively);
15% and 10% had some college; 26% and 31% up to a high school
education. Most parents worked outside the home (78% and 93%); 38%
and 40% were professionals, 31% and 27% technicians or sales people, 7%
and 22% worked in service jobs or as farmers, laborers, or in crafts. There
was also a range of family annual income, from under $20,000 (7%) to
above $60,000 (25%). Mothers' average age was 31 years, SD = 4.71;
fathers' 33 years, SD = 5.14. At 13-15 months (M = 13.65, SD = .74),
108 families returned (53 girls, 55 boys).
Child's Emotionality and Maternal Personality
at 8-10 Months
Children's Negative Emotionality in Standard Procedures
We assessed three early negative emotions1 (fear, anger, and discomfort)
using highly standardized paradigms and coding drawn from the Labora-
tory Temperament Assessment Battery (Lab-Tab; Goldsmith & Rothbart,
1996). Although Lab-Tab was designed originally for laboratory use, we
consulted with Goldsmith and learned that the paradigms had been con-
ducted at home with good results. There are no props or setups that require
a lab setting, so we conducted these infant paradigms at home. Because
discomfort is not part of the Lab-Tab, we designed several new episodes.
The paradigms and codes are described in detail in Kochanska, Coy,
Tjebkes, and Husarek (1998); thus, the description here is brief. The
cumulative length of the standard emotion procedures was approxi-
mately 15 min; the procedures were interspersed with other contexts that
provided naturalistic and relaxed "breaks" for the infant. Each paradigm
began when the infant was in a neutral mood and was terminated if the
highest codable level of distress was reached or if the mother wished to
do so.
Emotion paradigms. There were several episodes to elicit each of the
assessed emotions, and most involved multiple trials. Fear included four
episodes: Stranger Approach, Unpredictable Toy (an odd-looking dog
moving rapidly along the track approached infant), Masks (experimenter
consecutively put on four frightening masks), and sudden Parasol Opening.
Anger included three episodes: Arm Restraint (infant's arms were pressed
1
The emotion of joy was also assessed in several paradigms, but was not
studied further in this report.
 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING
to their sides), Car Seat (infant restrained in a car seat), and Toy Retraction
(taking away an attractive toy and holding in view). Discomfort episodes
included: Blender (aversive sound), Lemon (aversive taste of unsweetened
lemon juice), Spray (infant's face sprayed with water), and Ice (stomach
and back touched with a frozen object).
Coding. The coding segments were clearly specified for each episode.
The categories included latency to first response, discrete expressive be-
haviors specific to each emotion in three channels (facial, vocal, bodily),
and average and peak intensity of the expression in each of the channels
(for details, see Kochanska et al., 1998).
Reliability for the latencies was established in terms of seconds; 82% to
97% were coded within 1 s. All other codes were compared on a segment-
by-segment basis, using kappas, which ranged from .59 to 1.00. For the
intensity codes, each point of the scale was treated conservatively as a
separate code; kappas ranged from .60 to .90.
Data aggregation. For each episode, following the standardization of
all variables, intensity and peak scores were aggregated. Next, the reversed
latency to first emotion, sum of discrete behaviors, and average intensity
and peak scores were summed into an overall composite score for the entire
episode (range of as = .59 to .87). All episodes targeting a specific
emotion were then averaged, creating overall scores for fear, anger, and
discomfort. These scores were aggregated to create a composite score of
child negative emotionality in standard procedures, even though they were
minimally correlated (range of rs = - .00 to .17, p < .10). We reasoned
that all negative emotion scores should be included in a composite measure
of negative emotionality because our goal was to assess infant's difficult
emotionality, and these three emotions are all components of that construct
(Buss & Plomin, 1984; Crockenberg, 1986; Tellegen, Watson, & Clark,
1999; Thomas & Chess, 1977). That is, we have an additive model: High
negative emotionality can be due to proneness to anger, distress, and/or
fear.
Children's Negative Emotionality in Naturalistic
Interactions
Coding. Infant's negative emotionality was coded from videotapes for
each 30-s segment of the observed mother-child naturalistic interactions
(M = 114.62, SO = 4.02, range = 103-122), using a set of six affect codes
(joyful, sad, fearful, angry, fussy, and distressed). Within a segment, more
than one affect could be coded (e.g., fear, anger, and disgust could all be
coded as occurring during a given segment), but each was coded dichot-
omously—occurred or did not occur during the segment. If there was no
clear discrete affect, one of two mutually exclusive mood codes was
assigned, mild positive or mild negative. For the discrete affects, those that
were particularly intense and/or pervasive (lasting longer than 15 s) were
marked.
Reliability between one master coder and two other coders, based on
sampling all mother-child contexts, was computed on a segment-by-
segment basis. Kappas were .75 for one pair and .80 for the other pair of
coders.
Data aggregation. All instances of each negative affect code were
tallied across all segments. To reflect varying intensity, we weighted the
tallies of mild positive and mild negative by 1, those of the nonmarked
discrete affects by 2, and those of marked affect codes by 3. Then, all those
scores were summed, yielding an overall score of negative emotionality in
naturalistic interactions (Af = 64.28, SD = 37.10). Finally, the two
measures of negative emotionality were correlated (r = .22, p < .05), so
they were aggregated to create a robust index of child negative emotion-
ality2 for all further analyses.
Mother's Self-Reported Personality
When the children were 8-10 months old, mothers completed the NEO
Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the
277
Perspective-Taking scale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis,
1983). The NEO-FFI is a 60-item self-report inventory that measures five
basic dimensions of personality, including neuroticism (the general ten-
dency to experience negative affects), extraversion (tendency to be socia-
ble, assertive, active, and talkative), openness (measuring active imagina-
tion, aesthetic sensitivity, intellectual curiosity, and independence of
judgment), agreeableness (tendency to be altruistic, sympathetic, and eager
to help others), and conscientiousness (tendency to be planful, organized,
strong-willed, and purposeful). Perspective Taking is a 7-item self-report
scale that measures a tendency to adopt the psychological point of view of
others, or empathy, which is how we shall refer to the construct measured
by this scale. Internal consistency reliabilities (Cronbach's a) of mother's
self-reported personality traits were all acceptably high, neuroticism = .87;
extraversion = .72; openness = .84; agreeableness = .79; conscientious-
ness = .85; perspective taking = .82.
Parenting Behavior at 13-15 Months
Maternal Use of Power
We observed mothers and children in two disciplinary contexts: a toy
cleanup episode (7 min) and a prohibition context during which mothers
attempted to keep their children from touching extremely attractive toys
displayed on a low shelf in the laboratory room set up to resemble a
naturalistic living room (cumulatively 25 min). We coded mothers' style of
influence in terms of their use of power. The coding was adapted from
previous work (Kochanska & Aksan, 1995; see also, Kochanska, Forman,
& Coy, 1999).
Coding. Coding was done for each 30-s segment. In the cleanup
episode, up to 14 segments were coded. In the prohibition context, the
coding was event-triggered. Coders identified every episode of need for
control (when the child's attention shifted toward the prohibited toys), and
then coded each 30-s segment until the episode ended. Two kinds of codes
were used: a global rating of maternal control style, choosing one of five
mutually exclusive codes (no interaction, social exchange, gentle guidance,
control, and forceful intervention), and the recording of all physical inter-
ventions (none, distal signals, gentle physical guidance, assertive physical
control, and forceful-negative physical control). More than one physical
intervention could be coded in each segment, but each could be coded only
once.
Kappa reliability was .74 for the physical codes in the toy cleanup
episode and .72 in the prohibition context. Because the more power-
assertive global codes were very rare and difficult to code reliably, we
coded them by consensus. Alpha reliability for the initial identification of
the episodes in the prohibition context was .96.
Data aggregation. First, for both discipline contexts, we tallied all
instances of coded power-assertiveness (control and forceful global codes,
and assertive and forceful physical control). Then we divided each tally by
the number of coded segments, standardized and then averaged, first across
the two global power scores and then across the two physical power scores,
separately for the cleanup and the prohibition context. Next, we created one
general power score for the cleanup and an analogous score for the
prohibition by averaging the global and physical scores, which correlated
.56 (p < .001) for the cleanup episode and .21 {p < .05) for the prohibition
context. Finally, we averaged across these general power scores, which
also were correlated .30 (p < .003), creating one final score of maternal
use of power in discipline contexts.
Maternal Responsiveness, Microscopic Coding
We observed maternal responsiveness when mothers and children inter-
acted in naturalistic typical routines in the laboratory (approximately 40
2
Scores of positive emotionality in naturalistic interactions were also
created, but they were not considered in this report.
278 CLARK, KOCHANSKA, AND READY

min, encompassing multiple contexts: initial free time, snack, mother-
child teaching task, play, cleaning toys, and opening a gift together). The
coding and data aggregation are described in greater detail in Kochanska
(1998).
Coding. The coding was a revision of an earlier system (Kochanska,
1997b), a combination of time-sampled and event-triggered approaches
that entailed two passes through each videotape. First, for each 60-s
segment, the coder decided whether the child directed any signal to the
mother or was in a state requiring maternal response ("child-related
event"). Kappa reliabilities for this judgment ranged from .78 to .84. Each
child-related event was coded using one of five categories: distress, bid,
influence attempt, need for help, or physiological signal (coughs, hiccups).
Kappa reliabilities ranged from .63 to .74. If no child-related event was
present, the coder assigned one of four global codes, but those were not
used in this study.
Second, coders went back to each previously coded child-related event,
and evaluated maternal response using one of four mutually exclusive
codes: poor, fair, good, or exceptional. They integrated multiple dimen-
sions reflecting responsiveness (e.g., promptness, engagement, sincerity,
sensitivity, acceptance, cooperation; emotional availability; following child
lead and/or focus of attention; and adjusting the level of stimulation to
child state). Conventions specified what constituted each response code
given a specific category of child-related event (e.g., what it meant to be
poorly, fairly, well, or exceptionally responsive to child distress or to bid,
considering also developmental appropriateness at 13—15 months). Kappa
reliabilities regarding this judgment ranged from .78 to .81.
Data aggregation. First, all child-related events belonging to the same
category were tallied. On the average, children had 26.04 (SD = 14.23)
child-related events. Then, the instances when the mother responded
poorly, fairly, well, or exceptionally to the child-related events in each
category were tallied, and each tally was divided by the total number of
events in that category (the proportions of all instances of, for example,
child distress to which mother responded poorly, fairly, well, or excep-
tionally). Analogous scores were computed for each child-related event
category. Next, we created four broader composite scores for poor, fair,
good, and exceptional responses (each was the average across all five
categories of child-related e.vents).
Finally, an overall microscopic weighted score was created to reflect the
mother's general responsiveness. We weighted each of the four composite
scores (that of poor responses by -2, that of fair responses by - 1 , that of
good responses by + 1 , and that of exceptional responses by +2), and
summed them. Higher scores denoted higher responsiveness.
Maternal Responsiveness, Macroscopic Coding (Ratings)
Two different coders rated the same mother-child interactive contexts
using three classic 9-point scales (Ainsworth et al., 1971): sensitivity-
insensitivity, acceptance-rejection, and cooperation-interference. To in-
crease robustness, as we had done previously (e.g., Kochanska, 1998), the
coders rated each of the contexts (e.g., play, snack, etc.) rather than the
entire session, as is typically done. Alpha reliabilities were .99 for each
scale; kappas ranged from .73 to .76.
Data aggregation. For each context, all scales were correlated (rs >
.72) and were averaged into one score for each. These scores cohered
across contexts (a = .93) and were averaged into one overall macroscopic
Overall Maternal Responsiveness
The overall microscopic weighted score and the overall macroscopic
score converged (r = .33, p < .001). They were each standardized and
averaged into an overall maternal responsiveness score.
Results
Overview
In preliminary analyses, correlations among the predictors of
parenting were examined. Next, hierarchical multiple regressions
were used to gain a comprehensive view of the longitudinal
associations between mother personality, child negative emotion-
ality, and their interactions, assessed at 8-10 months, and maternal
parenting behavior assessed 5 months later. To that effect, mater-
nal personality traits, child negative emotionality, and the interac-
tion terms of each maternal personality trait with child negative
emotionality scores were the predictors.
Preliminary Analyses
Table 1 shows the intercorrelations among all final variables:
maternal personality, child negative emotionality, and parenting
(maternal use of power and responsiveness). Correlations among
the personality traits ranged from - .49 to .43, with a median r of
1.261. The degree of intercorrelation among the FFI scales is higher
than theoretically expected, but consistent with other empirical
studies using the instrument. As expected, perspective taking cor-
related most strongly with agreeableness, again suggesting it is a
facet of the broader trait (Watson et al., 1994).
Significant correlations (p < .05) were found between parenting
and personality. Neuroticism and conscientiousness correlated
with both power assertion and responsiveness, whereas agreeable-

Table 1
Intercorrelations of Maternal Personality, Child Negative Emotionality, and Parenting Behavior (N = 108)

Variable N E A C O PT CNE PA R

M 19.1 29.2 34.4 33.3 27.2 3.51

SD 7.8 5.3 5.3 6.3 7.0 .69
Neuroticism (N) — -.35*** -.36*** -.49*** .18 -.20* -.03 .28** -.22*
Extraversion (E) — .26** .22* .01 .08 .05 .17 -.02
Agreeableness (A) — .38** .03 .43*** -.12 -.13 .27**
Conscientiousness (C) -.27** .19 -.06 -.20* .32***
Openness (O) — .14 -.17 -.01 .06
Perspective taking (PT) — .05 -.13 .14
Child negative emotionality (CNE) — .23* -.08
Power assertion (PA) -.35***
Responsiveness (R) —

*p<.05. **/>< .01. * * * p < . 0 0 1 .

 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING 279

ness was associated with responsiveness. The two parenting vari-
ables were moderately negatively associated.
Hierarchical Multiple Regressions
Two regressions were performed, one predicting maternal
power assertion and one predicting maternal responsiveness, both
at 13-15 months. Predictor variables were entered in a hierarchical
fashion. First, the child's negative emotionality score was entered
at Step 1. Second, six maternal personality traits (neuroticism,
extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and per-
spective taking) were entered as a block at Step 2. Finally, all six
interaction terms between the personality traits and child negative
emotionality were entered as a block at Step 3. The regressions are
presented in Table 2 for maternal power assertion and in Table 3
for responsiveness.
To examine the specific form of the interactions for perspective
taking and extraversion, the slope of the final equation was com-
puted at points that corresponded to high and low levels of the
predictor variables (±1\SD), while holding all other variables
constant at zero (see Aiken & West, 1991, for a discussion of this
procedure). The results are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Mothers high
in perspective taking (empathy) responded with little use of ma-
ternal power, regardless of their child's level of negative emotion-
ality. In contrast, mothers low in empathy were far more likely to
use power assertion with children of high negative emotionality
(i.e., more difficult children). Similarly, mothers low in extraver-
sion (i.e., disengaged) used little power regardless of their child's
emotionality, whereas mothers high in extraversion responded
differentially to children high and low in negative emotionality:
They used high power if their child was high in negative emotion-
ality and low power with children who were less readily upset.

Predicting Maternal Power Assertion at 13-15 Months

from Maternal Personality and Child Negative
Emotionality at 8-10 Months
Together, child negative emotionality, maternal personality, and
their interactions assessed at 8-10 months account for 36% of the
variance in maternal power assertion assessed at 13-15 months.
Maternal neuroticism and extraversion produced significant main
effects: Mothers who scored higher on those traits used more
power assertion to accomplish their disciplinary goals when their
children were 13-15 months. Additionally, children's negative
emotionality at age 8-10 months evidenced a trend toward pre-
dicting mothers' higher use of power assertion 5 months later.
Furthermore, child negative emotionality significantly moderated
the relation between maternal personality and power assertion for
two traits: perspective taking and extraversion.
Predicting Maternal Responsiveness at 13-15 Months
from Maternal Personality and Child Negative
Emotionality at 8-10 Months
Table 3 shows the results of this series of regressions. Together,
child negative emotionality, maternal personality, and their inter-
actions explained 21% of the variance in maternal responsiveness
(see Table 3). Maternal conscientiousness was the strongest pre-
dictor, with both extraversion and agreeableness showing strong
trends. Thus, highly conscientious mothers were more responsive
to their children, and highly extraverted and/or agreeable mothers
showed this trend as well. Furthermore, child negative emotional-
ity showed a trend toward moderating the relation between mater-
nal conscientiousness and responsiveness; we did not explore this
result further because it was not statistically significant.

Table 2
Predicting Maternal Power Assertion at 13-15 Months From Maternal Personality Traits and
Child Negative Emotionality at 8-10 Months

Step 1 (R2 = .05) Step 2 (R2 = .23) Step 3 (R2 = .36)

Predictors at 8-10 months l, 106) F(7, 100) F(13,94)

Child negative emotionality 6.03* .23 5.77* .22 3.85t .20

Maternal personality traits
Neuroticism 10.91** .36 13.15*** .39
Extraversion 10.27** .31" 11.94*** .32
Conscientiousness -.09 -.08
Agreeableness -.05 .03
Openness -.04 -.06
Perspective taking -.06 1.31 -.11
Interactions of maternal personality traits and
child negative emotionality
Neuroticism X Negative Emotionality .10
Extraversion X Negative Emotionality 7.89* .27
Conscientiousness X Negative Emotionality cl -.01
Agreeableness X Negative Emotionality Cl .05
Openness X Negative Emotionality Cl .05
Perspective Taking X Negative 9.58** -.31
Emotionality

Note. F c h a n g e for child negative emotionality, maternal personality traits, and their interactions were 6.03*,
3.80**, and 3.20**, respectively. Overall F(13, 94) = 4.07***.
fp < .10 (marginally significant). * p < . 0 5 . **p < .01. *** p < .001.
280 CLARK, KOCHANSKA, AND READY

Table 3
Predicting Maternal Responsiveness at 13-15 Months From Maternal Personality Traits and
Child Negative Emotionality at 8-10 Months

Step 1 (R2 = .01) Step 2 (R2 = .17) Step 3 (R2 = .21)

Predictors at 8-10 months l, 106) /3 F(7, 100) , 94) j8

Child negative emotionality <1 -.08 -.01 <1 .04

Maternal personality trait
Neuroticism 1 -.10 1.07 -.12
Extraversion 2.54 -.16 2.90t -.18
Conscientiousness 6.49* .29 5.84* .28
Agreeableness 2.30 .17 2.91t .20
Openness 2.34 .15 2.55 .16
Perspective taking 1 -.01 -.02
Interactions of maternal personality traits and
child negative emotionality
Neuroticism x Negative Emotionality <! -.04
Extraversion X Negative Emotionality <1 -.02
Conscientiousness X Negative 3.14f .18
Emotionality
Agreeableness X Negative Emotionality <! -.10
Openness X Negative Emotionality 1.20 .13
Perspective Taking X Negative .04
Emotionality

Note. F chimge for child negative emotionality, maternal personality traits, and their interactions were
< 1 , 3.32**, and 0.76, respectively. Overall F(13, 94) = 1.91*.
tp<.10. *p<.05.

Discussion
Our findings inform research on both individual differences and
child development. Specifically, this study is one of the first to
examine the degree to which maternal personality, alone and in
interaction with child emotionality, predicts aspects of parenting
relevant to early childhood socialization. Furthermore, it is among
the very few to establish longitudinal links between personality
and observed parenting behavior.
This project overcomes several limitations of past research.
First, parenting behavior was assessed with rich observational
methods rather than with self-report. Second, personality assess-
ment was broad, including a measure of the Big Five and also
perspective taking (empathy). Third, data were collected from a
community sample rather than from a clinical population, thereby
reducing psychopathology-based state effects on the measurement
of personality and behavior. Fourth, while examining the relations
between personality and parenting, we also incorporated the com-
plex effects of child temperament. And fifth, maternal personality,
parenting, and child negative emotionality were all assessed inde-
pendently, at different times (8-10 months vs. 13-15 months) and
using distinct methods (self-report vs. coded observations).
Predicting Maternal Power Assertion
Mothers who were high in either neuroticism or extraversion
used a more controlling or forceful style in discipline contexts with
their young toddlers. The result regarding neuroticism is consistent
with our prediction, which was based on previous, robust findings
that neuroticism is associated with less adaptive parenting (Belsky
et al., 1995; Brook, Tseng, Whiteman, & Cohen, 1998; Cummings
& Davies, 1994; Fish & Stifter, 1993; Goldstein et al., 1996;
Kochanska et al., 1997). This result is also highly consistent with
the established links between maternal depression and parenting
problems (e.g., Dodge, 1990; Downey & Coyne, 1990; Goodman
& Gotlib, 1999).
The positive association between extraversion and power-
assertive parenting behavior was not predicted. However, Kochan-
ska et al. (1997) reported a similar finding that a facet of extra-
version (i.e., sociability-affiliation) was associated with power
assertion. At this point, it is only possible to speculate about the
reasons for this link. Perhaps the high degree of engagement that
is characteristic of extraversion contributes to more dominant,
assertive behavior in contexts associated with discipline and pro-
hibition. Alternatively, mothers low in extraversion (i.e., intro-
verted) may be more withdrawn and unassertive in pursuing dis-
ciplinary goals.
On the surface, the finding of an association between extraver-
sion and power assertion is in contrast to that reported by Man-
gelsdorf et al. (1990) and Kendler et al. (1997) who found positive
associations between positive affectivity-extraversion and mater-
nal warmth. However, extraversion is a broad, multifaceted con-
struct that is characterized by a range of subtraits, including
affiliation, energy, ambition, positive activity, ascendance, and
venturesomeness (Watson & Clark, 1997). In fact, extraversion as
measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, the parent
instrument of the NEO-FFT used in this study, includes the facets
of both warmth and assertiveness (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Ex-
traversion also has been found to be strongly correlated with the
interpersonal dimensions of affiliation and dominance (Costa &
McCrae, 1988). Thus, the multifactorial nature of extraversion
may explain the differential associations reported between this
construct and various aspects of parenting behavior. In the future,
 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING
0.8 -r
J
-0.4
High
Maternal Perspective Taking
Figure 1. Interaction between maternal perspective taking and child emotionality: Associations with maternal
power assertion. High and low values correspond to +1 SD and -1 SD from the mean, respectively.
it will be worthwhile to examine the differential impact of the
specific aspects of extraversion on parenting, which will require a
more differentiated measure of extraversion than used in this
study.
In addition to the main effects of maternal personality, its
interactions with child negative emotionality also contributed sig-
nificantly to the prediction of power-assertive parenting. Specifi-
cally, mothers low in perspective taking (empathy) were more
likely to adopt a power-assertive style with children high in neg-
ative emotionality. However, mothers high in empathy were not
typically power assertive, regardless of their children's tempera-
ment. This finding is generally consistent with established links
between low empathy and physical child abuse (Rosenstein, 1995)
but suggests that low empathy or the inability to take alternative
perspectives may result in more power-assertive parenting only
with difficult children. Similarly, mothers high in extraversion
were more power assertive only with children high in negative
emotionality. Mothers with low extraversion were not power as-
sertive with either easy or difficult children. Perhaps children low
in negative emotionality are easily guided, so even assertive,
extraverted mothers tend not to use power tactics to obtain
cooperation.
The discovery of interactions between maternal personality and
child emotionality highlights the bidirectionality of parent-child
relationships, consistent with contemporary socialization theories
281
Hlgh child negative emotionality
DLow child negative emotionality
Low
(Maccoby, 1992). How mothers respond to their children depends
in part on their own personalities and in part on their children's
emotionality. Specific combinations of maternal traits and child
emotionality may differentially affect maternal behavior depend-
ing on the situational context. Interactions between maternal per-
sonality and infant emotionality also have been found to predict
security of attachment (Mangelsdorf et al., 1990). These interac-
tions are a new form of the classic goodness-of-fit models of child
development, and they highlight and substantiate the important
interplay between maternal personality and child emotionality
(Thomas & Chess, 1977).
These findings also are relevant to developmental psychopathol-
ogy, because they elucidate the interactive and multifactorial na-
ture of risk for child maltreatment, consistent with Belsky's (1984)
model. Although the power-assertive behaviors assessed in our
study were quite mild by any standard, a similar process may occur
at a more extreme end of forceful parenting. Given extreme infant
difficulty and extremely low maternal empathy or extremely high
extraversion, the risk for physical abuse within a dyad may be
substantial. A mother who lacks empathic or role-taking abilities
may have particular difficulty reading her infant's signals and
envisioning an appropriate soothing response. Given a difficult
infant's low soothability and high negativity, it is easy to imagine
how the dyad may launch on a mutually aversive trajectory.
282 CLARK, KOCHANSKA, AND READY

0.8 i

• High child negative emotionality

D Low child negative emotionality

J
-0.4
High Low

Maternal Extraversion
Figure 2. Interaction between maternal extraversion and child emotionality: Associations with maternal power
assertion. High and low values correspond to +1 SD and -1 SD from the mean, respectively.

Conceptualizing child negative emotionality as a chronic stres-
sor, these findings suggest interactions among maternal personal-
ity, stress, and parenting behavior and can be related to the liter-
ature on adult personality and interpersonal behavior that also has
found personality-stress-behavior interactions. For example, in-
dividuals high and low in neuroticism exhibited opposite response
patterns in stressful situations involving close and distant others
(O'Brien & DeLongis, 1996).
Predicting Maternal Responsiveness
Our findings indicated that mothers high in conscientiousness
were more responsive to their children. This finding is concordant
with expectations based on current conceptualizations of respon-
siveness. Our measure reflected the multidimensional nature of
responsiveness (De Wolff & van IJzendoorn, 1997; Thompson,
1998), capturing maternal ability to respond sensitively and
promptly to child signals, provide appropriate support and com-
fort, follow the child's lead, respect his or her autonomy, adjust
one's own behavior to the child's current state or needs, and so
forth. Clearly, some of the traits subsumed under conscientious-
ness (and, to a lesser extent, agreeableness and extraversion, which
showed trends toward predicting responsiveness), such as being
organized, purposeful, altruistic, or skillful and affectively positive
in social interactions, should facilitate responsive parenting.
The findings regarding conscientiousness (and the trend ob-
served for agreeableness) also are consistent with past research.
For example, Kochanska et al. (1997) found that maternal
conscientiousness, whereas not directly related to self-reported
parenting behavior, was positively associated with children's
adaptive outcomes. Similarly, parental responsiveness, partic-
ularly early in life, has been linked to many adaptive develop-
mental outcomes, mostly secure attachment, although the
strength of that link has been questioned (De Wolff & van
IJzendoorn, 1997; Thompson, 1998). Belsky et al. (1995) re-
ported that mothers higher in agreeableness engaged in more
positive and less negative parenting, and Kochanska et al.
(1997) found that low agreeableness interfered with adaptive
parenting and positive child development.
It was somewhat surprising, and in contrast to past work
(Kochanska, 1997b), that maternal perspective taking was not
strongly associated as a main effect with either measure of ob-
served parenting. In a theoretical model of parenting that incorpo-
rates empathic goals, Dix (1992) predicted a positive relation
between empathy and responsive parenting. Empathy, however, is
a complex personality construct that is less well understood than
the Big Five dimensions. Thus, our 7-item measure of empathy
may not have adequately tapped aspects of this construct that are
pertinent to parenting behavior.
 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING
Conclusion
This study contributes to a growing literature relating self-
reported personality to behavior that is relevant to major life
domains. Examinations of personality-behavior links have incor-
porated the use of observational assessment methods (e.g., Funder
& Sneed, 1993) and longitudinal designs (e.g., Magnus, Diener,
Fujita, & Pavot, 1993). Rarely, however, have predictions between
personality and behavior observed several months later been
tested. The longitudinal personality-behavior links we found are
encouraging because they indicate the predictive utility of person-
ality traits.
Parent personality, alone and in interaction with child emotion-
ality, accounted for a significant portion of the variance of ob-
served parenting. A substantial amount of this variance, however,
remained unexplained. One possibility is that, relative to the num-
ber of variables included in the analyses, the sample size was
insufficient to detect small but interesting effects; a more complex
picture might have emerged with a larger, more diverse sample.
On the other hand, we may have included too few variables. Parent
personality and child emotionality are only two of multiple factors
that determine how responsively or forcefully a mother will act in
a particular context. Parental mood or the broader context in which
the behavior occurs also may contribute to parenting behavior. As
mentioned earlier, Belsky et al. (1995) found evidence for the
mediating effects of daily hassles and transient mood in a model
examining associations between personality and parenting. Crock-
enberg (1986) also showed that infants' negativity predicted inse-
cure attachment, but only if mothers lacked social support. Thus,
in addition to parent personality and child emotionality, future
research examining determinants of parenting should include mea-
sures of other potential factors.
This study is limited by the exclusive focus on mothers. The
impact of fathers' personality on their parenting is a neglected area
of research, with preliminary findings suggesting different links
between personality and parenting for mothers and fathers (Belsky
et al., 1995). Thus, future investigations should focus on charac-
teristics of both parents and these characteristics' interaction with
child variables.
References
Aiken, L. S., & West. S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M. V., & Stayton, D. J. (1971). Individual
differences in strange-situation behavior in one-year-olds. In H. R.
Schaffer (Ed.), The origins of human social relations (pp. 17-57).
London: Academic Press.
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C , Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns
of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Asendorpf, J. B. (1998). Personality effects on social relationships. Journal
of Personality & Social Psychology, 74, 1531-1544.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Observing interaction: An intro-
duction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Ridge, B. (1998). Interaction of
temperamental resistance to control and restrictive parenting in the
development of externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychology, 34,
982-995.
Bell, R. Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies
of socialization. Psychological Review, 75, 81-85.
283
Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child
Development, 55, 83-96.
Belsky, J. (1997). Theory testing, effect-size evaluation, and differential
susceptibility to rearing influences: The case of mothering and attach-
ment. Child Development, 68, 598-600.
Belsky, J., Crnic, K., & Woodworth, S. (1995). Personality and parenting:
Exploring the mediating role of transient mood and daily hassles. Jour-
nal of Personality, 63, 905-929.
Booth-Kewley, S., & Vickers, R. R. (1994). Associations between major
domains of personality and health behavior. Journal of Personality, 62,
281-298.
Brook, J. S., Tseng, L. J., Whiteman, M., & Cohen, P. (1998). A three-
generation study: Intergenerational continuities and discontinuities and
their impact on toddlers anger. Genetic, Social, & General Psychology
Monographs, 124, 335-351.
Bugental, D. B., & Goodnow, J. J. (1998). Socialization processes. In W.
Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th
ed., pp. 389-462). New York: Wiley.
Buss, A. H., & Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early developing per-
sonality traits. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clark, L. A., Watson, D., & Mineka, S. (1994). Temperament, personality,
and the mood and anxiety disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
103, 103-116.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). From catalog to classification:
Murray's needs and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 55, 258-265.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory
and NEO Five-Factor Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Crockenberg, S. (1986). Are temperamental differences in babies associ-
ated with predictable differences in care giving? In J. V. Lerner & R. M.
Lerner (Eds.), Temperament and social interaction during infancy and
childhood (pp. 53-73). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (1994). Maternal depression and child
development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 73-112.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evi-
dence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 44, 113-126.
De Wolff, M. S., & van Uzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attach-
ment: A meta-analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment.
Child Development, 68, 571-591.
Dix, T. (1992). Parenting on behalf of the child: Empathic goals in the
regulation of responsive parenting. In I. E. Sigel & A. V. McGillicuddy-
DeLisi (Eds.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences
for children (2nd ed., pp. 319-346). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dodge, K. A. (1990). Developmental psychopathology in children of
depressed mothers. Developmental Psychology, 26, 3—67.
Downey, G., & Coyne, J. G. (1990). Children of depressed parents: An
integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 50-76.
Eder, R. A., & Mangelsdorf, S. C. (1997). The emotional basis of early
personality development: Implications for the emergent self-concept. In
R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality
psychology (pp. 209-240). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Schaller, M., & Carlo, G. (1991). The relations
of parental characteristics and practices to children's vicarious emotional
responding. Child Development, 62, 1393-1408.
Epstein, S. (1983). Aggregation and beyond: Some basic issues on the
prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality, 51, 360-392.
Fish, M., & Stifter, C. A. (1993). Mother parity as a main and moderating
influence on early mother—infant interaction. Journal of Applied Devel-
opmental Psychology, 14, 557—572.
Frankel, K. A., & Harmon, R. J. (1996). Depressed mothers: They don't
284 CLARK, KOCHANSKA, AND READY
always look as bad as they feel. Journal of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 289-298.
Funder, D. C , & Sneed, C. D. (1993). Behavioral manifestations of
personality: An ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 479-490.
Gilbert, D. G., Stunkard, M. E., Jensen, R. A., & Detwiler, F. R. J. (1996).
Effects of exam stress on mood, cortisol, and immune functioning:
Influences of neuroticism and smoker—nonsmoker status. Personality
and Individual Differences, 21, 235-246.
Goldsmith, H. H., & Rothbart, M. K. (1996). The Laboratory Temperament
Assessment Battery (Lab-TAB): Locomotor Version 3.0 (Technical man-
ual). Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
Goldstein, L. H., Diener, M. L., & Mangelsdorf, S. C. (1996). Maternal
characteristics and social support across the transition to motherhood:
Associations with maternal behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 10,
60-71.
Goodman, S. H., & Gotlib, I. H. (1999). Risk for psychopathology in the
children of depressed mothers: A developmental model for understand-
ing mechanisms of transmission. Psychological Review, 106, 458-490.
Gough, H. G. (1987). Manual for the California Personality Inventory,
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Halverson, C. F., & Wampler, K. S. (1997). Family influences on person-
ality development. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Hand-
book of personality psychology (pp. 241-268). San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic Press.
Hogan, R., Johnson, J., & Briggs, S. (1997). Handbook of personality
psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Kendler, K. S., Sham, P. C , & MacLean, C. J. (1997). The determinants of
parenting: An epidemiological, multi-informant, retrospective study.
Psychological Medicine, 27, 549-563.
Kochanska, G. (1997a). Multiple pathways to conscience for children with
different temperaments: From toddlerhood to age 5. Developmental
Psychology, 33, 228-240.
Kochanska, G. (1997b). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers
and their young children: Implications for early socialization. Child
Development, 68, 94-112.
Kochanska, G. (1998). Mother-child relationship, child fearfulness, and
emerging attachment: A short-term longitudinal study. Developmental
Psychology, 34, 480-490.
Kochanska, G., & Aksan, N. (1995). Mother-child mutually positive
affect, the quality of child compliance to requests and prohibitions, and
maternal control as correlates of early internalization. Child Develop-
ment, 66, 236-254.
Kochanska, G., Clark, L. A., & Goldman, M. S. (1997). Implications of
mothers' personality for their parenting and their young children's
developmental outcomes. Journal of Personality, 65, 389-420.
Kochanska, G., Coy, K. C , Tjebkes, T. L., & Husarek, S. J. (1998).
Individual differences in emotionality in infancy. Child Development,
69, 375-390.
Kochanska, G., Forman, G., & Coy, K. C. (1999). Implications of the
mother-child relationship in infancy for socialization in the second year
of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 22, 249-265.
Kuczynski, L., Kochanska, G., Radke-Yarrow, M., & Girnius Brown, O.
(1987). A developmental interpretation of young children's noncompli-
ance. Developmental Psychology, 23, 799-806.
Lytton, H. (1990). Child and parent effects in boys' conduct disorder: A
reinterpretation. Developmental Psychology, 26, 683-697.
Maccoby, E. E. (1992). The role of parents in the socialization of children:
An historical overview. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1006-1017.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context of the
family: Parent-child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & E. M.
Heatherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. So-
cialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1-101).
New York: Wiley.
Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and
neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal anal-
ysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1046-1053.
Mangelsdorf, S., Gunnar, M., Kestenbaum, R., Lang, S., & Andreas, D.
(1990). Infant proneness-to-distress temperament, maternal personality,
and mother-infant attachment: Associations and goodness of fit. Child
Development, 61, 820-831.
Marco, C. A., & Suls, J. (1993). Daily stress and the trajectory of mood:
Spillover, response assimilation, contrast, and chronic negative affectiv-
ity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 1053-1063.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1984). Emerging lives, enduring disposi-
tion: Personality in adulthood. Boston: Little, Brown.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1988). Recalled parent-child relations and
adult personality. Journal of Personality, 56, 417-434.
Milgrom, J., & McCloud, P. (1996). Parenting stress and postnatal depres-
sion. Stress Medicine, 12, 177-186.
Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Five-factor model
of personality and performance in jobs involving interpersonal interac-
tions. Human Performance, 11, 145-165.
O'Brien, T. B., & DeLongis, A. (1996). The interactional context of
problem-, emotion-, and relationship-focused coping: The role of the Big
Five personality factors. Journal of Personality, 64, 775-813.
Parker, G. (1989). The Parental Bonding Instrument: Psychometric prop-
erties reviewed. Psychiatric Developments, 4, 317-335.
Peterson, B. E., Smirles, K. A., & Wentworth, P. A. (1997). Generativity
and authoritarianism: Implications for personality, political involvement,
and parenting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1202-
1216.
Pincus, A. L., & Ruiz, M. A. (1997). Parental representations and dimen-
sions of personality: Empirical relations and assessment implications.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 436-454.
Richters, J. E. (1992). Depressed mothers as informants about their chil-
dren: A critical review of the evidence of distortion. Psychological
Bulletin, 112, 485-499.
Rosenstein, P. (1995). Parental levels of empathy as related to risk assess-
ment in child protective services. Child Abuse and Neglect, 19, 1349-
1360.
Rushton, J. P., Brainerd, C. J., & Pressley, M. (1983). Behavioral devel-
opment and construct validity. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 18-38.
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people make their own environ-
ments: A theory of genotype-environment effects. Child Develop-
ment, 54, 424-435.
Tangney, J. P. (1988). Aspects of the family and children's television
viewing content preferences. Child Development, 59, 1070-1079.
Tellegen, A. (in press). The Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire.
University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis.
Tellegen, A., Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1999). On the dimensional and
hierarchical structure of affect. Psychological Science, 10, 297-303.
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., Rothstein, M., & Reddon, J. R. (1999).
Meta-analysis of bidirectional relations in personality-job performance
research. Human Performance, 12, 1-29.
Thomas, A., & Chess, S. (1977). Temperament and development. New
York: Brunner/Mazel.
Thompson, R. A. (1998). Early sociopersonality development. In W.
Damon (Series Ed.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th
ed., pp. 25-104). New York: Wiley.
Watson, D. (1988). Intraindividual and interindividual analyses of positive
and negative affect: Their relation to health complaints, perceived stress,
and daily activities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54,
1020-1030.
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (Eds.). (1994). Personality and psychopathol-
ogy [Special issue]. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103 (1).
 PERSONALITY AND PARENTING 285

Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1995). Depression and the melancholic Wiebe, D. J., & Smith, T. W. (1997). Personality and health: Progress and
temperament. European Journal of Personality, 9, 351-356. problems in psychosomatics. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs,
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 891-918). San Diego,
core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs, (Eds.), Handbook of CA: Academic Press.
personality psychology (pp. 767-793). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Harkness, A. R. (1994). Structures of person-
ality and their relevance to psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 103, 18-31.
Widiger, T. A., & Trull, T. J. (1992). Personality and psychopathology: An Received November 5, 1999
application of the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 60, 363- Revision received April 13, 2000
393. Accepted April 24, 2000

Call for Nominations

The Publications and Communications Board has opened nominations for the
editorships of Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, Journal of Educational Psychology, Psychological Bulletin, and Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology: Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes
for the years 2003-2008. Kevin R. Murphy, PhD, Philip C. Kendall, PhD, Michael
Pressley, PhD, Nancy Eisenberg, PhD, and Chester A. Insko, PhD, respectively, are the
incumbent editors.

Candidates should be members of APA and should be available to start receiving

manuscripts in early 2002 to prepare for issues published in 2003. Please note that the
P&C Board encourages participation by members of underrepresented groups in the
publication process and would particularly welcome such nominees. Self-nominations
are also encouraged.

To nominate candidates, prepare a statement of one page or less in support of

each candidate and send to

• Margaret B. Spencer, PhD, for the Journal of Applied Psychology

• Donna M. Gelfand, PhD, and Lucia Albino Gilbert, PhD, for the Journal of Con-
sulting and Clinical Psychology
• Lauren B. Resnick, PhD, for the Journal of Educational Psychology
• Janet Shibley Hyde, PhD, and Randi C. Martin, PhD, for Psychological Bulletin
• Sara B. Kiesler, PhD, for JPSP: Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes

Address all nominations to the appropriate search committee at the following

address:

[Name of journal] Search Committee

c/o Karen Sellman, P&C Board Search Liaison
Room 2004
American Psychological Association
750 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002-4242

The first review of nominations will begin December 11, 2000.